(Original post by tif49)
Now as for the 3 year old, we say that God grants him a new and better life in the next life. The 3 year old and all others will be compensated for their sufferings and they will be given new opportunities.

People who don't believe in God and the afterlife are much more cruel. They say that you'll have to suffer all you're life and then just die having been in hell all your life. We say no, God grants you new opportunities and compensates you more than sufficiently in the next life. .

You don't see that as cruel? God allowing a child to be born who will only know suffering. Why not just skip ahead and let that kid just have the happiness that you say comes afterwards? In this case all God is doing is torturing a child and mentally scaring that child's family. He's putting them through the most horrendous experience a parent can have and for what? To teach them a lesson? Come on, that's just messed up.

Practice safe sex.

Yeah because it's always that simple. What about a woman who's raped by someone with HIV and passes that on to a child? Why do the mother and child deserve that? What lesson do they learn..."thou shall not be raped"?

(Original post by tif49)
Diseases aren't just from God. They are often a result of man's own actions. Diseases ultimatley have many benefits as well. Imagine if there was no disease, no suffering, where would our incentive be to progress?

Haven't you heard of the saying, 'what doesn't kill you makes you stronger'? Diseases give us reason to research and discover. They give us sympathy and empathy for our fellow human beings.

If there was no disease, there would be hardly any progress now would there?

Now as for the 3 year old, we say that God grants him a new and better life in the next life. The 3 year old and all others will be compensated for their sufferings and they will be given new opportunities.

You're definitely not a doctor, because as far as I am aware, unless you have been sending your child on regular trips to Chenobyl, there is no way a parent could 'cause' leukaemia. And if there were no disease, there would be no need for progress. Why would we need to treat diseases that do not exist?

(Original post by tif49)
See my latest post. There are many reasons for this and a baby born with HIV, it's the babies parents fault then isn't it? Why blame God? It's a warning for people about their sexual acts. Practice safe sex.

Many a time it is the fault of previous generations acts of misusing their body and not taking care of it.

But you have to look at the bigger picture, it's all a part of a larger and wider design of nature. See my other post.

So the child is punished for the sins of the mother. And yet you feel, no doubt, that your religion provides you with a good moral compass.

As for the greater good, you're claiming that the ends justify the means. But an omnipotent god could by definition achieve whatever ends it liked without resorting to such crude and distressing means. This suggests that either disease is not the work of god (which contradicts it's role as creator and controller of all things), or that your god enjoys inflicting suffering (which contradicts it's description as benevolent - although the bible is pretty damning anyway).

In any case, disease could still serve the purposes you claim for it if vertical transmission and congenital defects did not occur.

Just the way it happened to be, OR perhaps the way it HAD to be if we were to exist at all. If the Universe turned out to be 1/10th of the size, maybe we just wouldn't be here to observe it at all, or maybe we would just be 1/10th of the size we are now and still think it's just as big.

As someone much more interesting than me said, which may describe it quite well: "This is why Science and Mathematics are so much fun, you discover things that seem impossible to be true, and then get to figure out why it's impossible for them not to be."

(Original post by gateshipone)
You don't see that as cruel? God allowing a child to be born who will only know suffering. Why not just skip ahead and let that kid just have the happiness that you say comes afterwards? In this case all God is doing is torturing a child and mentally scaring that child's family. He's putting them through the most horrendous experience a parent can have and for what? To teach them a lesson? Come on, that's just messed up.

Now you see it's not just about teaching a lesson. It also leads to human sympathy and empathy. It makes you appreciate what you have does it not? It makes you grateful and thankful. It's not just that though:

Imagine if there was no 'torture' or suffering. How could you skip to the part where their is happiness? You wouldn't know what happiness was if there was no suffering.

Just as there can't be good without evil, there can't be happiness without suffering. One cannot exist without the other. This is the balance of life and nature.

Now the purpose of this life is to go through hardships and strive for better and for goodness, whatever the circumstances, only then will you be worthy of a reward and eternal happiness. If you haven't suffered or endured some hardship your efforts will be useless and you won't really be worthy of a reward then will you? For having done nothing, or having endured nothing.

When you work hard and achieve something then the reward is so much better isn't it? So when God sees that you do good deeds and work hard in this life and help others, despite your own circumstances, He gives you a reward based on your efforts. The more you try, the more you endure, the bigger and better the Mercy and reward of God will be.

(Original post by gateshipone)
Yeah because it's always that simple. What about a woman who's raped by someone with HIV and passes that on to a child? Why do the mother and child deserve that? What lesson do they learn..."thou shall not be raped"?

This is why rape is so harshly punishable in religion.

Also you guys are all missing the bigger picture. This earth, this life is all about a balance of good and bad, happiness and sadness etc.

Religion says that those people who suffered will be compensated whereas atheists are so cruel as to say no, that's what nature is, you're gonna suffer then die.

(Original post by tif49)
there can't be happiness without suffering. One cannot exist without the other. This is the balance of life and nature.

Sure there can. My cousin is 4 months old and never stops smiling and giggling. She seems to be happy and hasn't suffered at all. Seems to me you're just trying to make excuses for your God being a complete arse and allowing people who don't deserve it to suffer greatly. My Grandmother was Christian and prayed her whole life. Her final reward on this Earth was a slow, painful death to cancer. You're telling me that God couldn't have thrown her a bone and just let her die peacefully?

Religion says that those people who suffered will be compensated whereas atheists are so cruel as to say no, that's what nature is, you're gonna suffer then die.

Yeah, whereas you say there's an all powerful being who could step in and remove suffering any time he likes, but actually goes out of his way not to. Now that is cruel and not a being worthy of worshipping.

(Original post by chickenonsteroids)
When you were younger, do you remember playing with lego? You started off with a few blocks and started off small then got carried away then it ended up massive until you used up all the blocks so you could show your mum and friends your later... then you put in little figures and made a small story. That's what happened with the universe.

God is in heaven showing off the universe to all his mini creations so his face always equals
True story.

(Original post by najinaji)
You're definitely not a doctor, because as far as I am aware, unless you have been sending your child on regular trips to Chenobyl, there is no way a parent could 'cause' leukaemia. And if there were no disease, there would be no need for progress. Why would we need to treat diseases that do not exist?

I already said I'm no doctor nor have any extraordinary scientific or medical knowledge.

Moreover I never said a parent causes leukaemia, I said other diseases such as HIV are passed on to the child.

The whole point of life is to learn and to develop and progress and help our fellow human beings. Now tell me without diseases, would we have developed all this knowledge and made all these discoveries and advanced so far in life?

One thing cannot possibly exist without the other. Don't you guys understand that? Without suffering there would be no such thing as happiness. Also because of suffering we have the motivation and incentive to look for better and to help one another to progress in life.

(Original post by mmmpie)
So the child is punished for the sins of the mother. And yet you feel, no doubt, that your religion provides you with a good moral compass.

No, the point was that God is not to blame, it is ourselves. Also like I've said, the child will be compensated for sufferings which was not directly his own doing.

As for the greater good, you're claiming that the ends justify the means. But an omnipotent god could by definition achieve whatever ends it liked without resorting to such crude and distressing means. This suggests that either disease is not the work of god (which contradicts it's role as creator and controller of all things), or that your god enjoys inflicting suffering (which contradicts it's description as benevolent - although the bible is pretty damning anyway).

How can God reward a person without the person deserving it? What would be the point? The whole point of life is to go through it living a good moral life while helping others and developing yourself and your soul so that in the next life, your soul will be sufficiently developed enough to experience the delights of the next life. Now every single person on this earth goes through some sort of hardships, many times in life.

By enduring it all and still doing good despite the hardships, you will the pleasure of God who then rewards you for your efforts. There is no reward without effort.

In any case, disease could still serve the purposes you claim for it if vertical transmission and congenital defects did not occur.

God has created laws of nature. If you go against it, you suffer. If you go with it, you thrive and progress, simple.

(Original post by tif49)
I already said I'm no doctor nor have any extraordinary scientific or medical knowledge.

Moreover I never said a parent causes leukaemia, I said other diseases such as HIV are passed on to the child.

The whole point of life is to learn and to develop and progress and help our fellow human beings. Now tell me without diseases, would we have developed all this knowledge and made all these discoveries and advanced so far in life?

One thing cannot possibly exist without the other. Don't you guys understand that? Without suffering there would be no such thing as happiness. Also because of suffering we have the motivation and incentive to look for better and to help one another to progress in life.

Yes, but I'm asking why God invented cancer. Why did he?

Also, we wouldn't have needed to make discoveries about disease if disease didn't exist. And we'd be all the happier if it didn't.

(Original post by gateshipone)
Sure there can. My cousin is 4 months old and never stops smiling and giggling. She seems to be happy and hasn't suffered at all. Seems to me you're just trying to make excuses for your God being a complete arse and allowing people who don't deserve it to suffer greatly. My Grandmother was Christian and prayed her whole life. Her final reward on this Earth was a slow, painful death to cancer. You're telling me that God couldn't have thrown her a bone and just let her die peacefully?

Your 4 months old cousin is a baby who is very early in the stages of development. You're suggesting that you'd be happier living as a baby all your life?

She will grow up and discover the world and due to her want of happiness and satisfaction, she will go through life helping others, doing good deeds, despite whatever life throws at her. In the end she will be deserving of a great reward from God for her efforts in this life.

Your Grandmother has probably forgotten all about her suffering and is pleased that despite all the trials that life gave her, she remained faithful to God. Now she is probably living in contentment and happiness in Heaven where all her desires are fulfilled at her very asking. Don't you get it? Pain is temporary. This life is just a test.

Yeah, whereas you say there's an all powerful being who could step in and remove suffering any time he likes, but actually goes out of his way not to. Now that is cruel and not a being worthy of worshipping.

This suffering is temporoary and is a kind of mercy from God. Because of this suffering, you'll be granted a great reward due to your good actions on this earth despite your suffering.

This life is temporary. It doesn't last for ever. In fact it is very short, it is only a test from God. Your not alone in suffering, everyone goes through it but they also come out of it. Suffering is almost like a refining mechanism for people, to teach them patience, endurance, perseverance. When you come out of it, it is the best feeling in the world. Imagine then what happens when you come out of this horrible life and God grants you Heaven, all your suffering and efforts will be worthwhile.

Suffering/hardships/effort = success, reward, happiness.

The first part is hard but it's only temporary, the next part is forever. Ask any successful businessman.

(Original post by tif49)
No, the point was that God is not to blame, it is ourselves. Also like I've said, the child will be compensated for sufferings which was not directly his own doing.

Please explain how we are to blame for congenital heart defects. Those occur at random.

I don't accept your view of compensation either. If you commit a crime and then pay compensation to your victim, even compensation which is more than sufficient to undo the damage done, that does not mean that you were somehow within your rights to commit the crime in the first place.

(Original post by tif49)
How can God reward a person without the person deserving it? What would be the point? The whole point of life is to go through it living a good moral life while helping others and developing yourself and your soul so that in the next life, your soul will be sufficiently developed enough to experience the delights of the next life. Now every single person on this earth goes through some sort of hardships, many times in life.

By enduring it all and still doing good despite the hardships, you will the pleasure of God who then rewards you for your efforts. There is no reward without effort.

I didn't ask for a reward, I asked for an easing off on the unnecessary suffering.

I rather like this for the way it plays to the moral superiority of atheists though. After all, any good an atheist does is not done for the promise of reward or fear of punishment, but for it's own sake.

(Original post by tif49)
God has created laws of nature. If you go against it, you suffer. If you go with it, you thrive and progress, simple.

And what are these laws of nature? I assume you don't mean the laws of physics or any other scientific law, since those cannot by definition be violated.